Iraq, Islamic State, Middle East, Politics, Syria, United States

Resolving the crisis in the Arab world requires liberating Mosul…

IRAQ

Intro: By liberating Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, offers high expectations of assuaging Sunni anger

Those bearing the brunt of war across the Fertile Crescent – from the Mediterranean to the Gulf –  are for the most part Sunni Arabs. Whilst they form the largest ethnic group and are heirs and inheritors of fabled empires, many of their great and ancient cities are now in the hands of others: the Jews in Jerusalem, the Christians and Shias in Beirut, the Alawites in Damascus, and, more recently, the Shias in Baghdad. A further study of the disturbing patterns that have emerged also reveals that Sunni’s constitute the bulk of the region’s refugees. Where Sunnis hold on to power, as in the Gulf States, they feel encircled by a hostile and overbearing Iran and abandoned by America that is perceived as being indifferent to the changing demographics of control throughout the Arab world.

The divisions go beyond sectarianism. Almost everywhere the Arab state is in turmoil and crisis aggravated by many years of misrule, often no less than by Sunni leaders. We need look no further than Iraq’s appalling former tyrant, Saddam Hussein, the quintessential Sunni Arab strongman, or of Egypt’s flawed and deposed leader, Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi. The sense that Sunnis’ are being assailed from all sides helps to explain how the jihadists of Islamic State are offering to restore the ancient caliphate. IS has taken over vast Sunni-populated areas of Syria and Iraq, yet, no battlefield victory against Islamic State can ever be complete, or no diplomatic solution lasting, until the dispossession of the Sunnis’ has been dealt with.

The future of the region is currently being decided in two venerable cities: Aleppo, the last conurbation of the Syrian rebellion against Bashar al-Assad, and Mosul, IS’s most prized possession in Iraq. The conduct of the battles, and the political order that will follow, will ultimately determine the course of the region’s barbaric wars. The best hopes for peace lies in federalism and of decentralisation which would give Sunnis (and others) a proper voice.

Aleppo has become the symbol of the worst sort of external intervention. Russia’s Vladimir Putin is helping Assad’s troops in Syria, as well as their Iranian and Shia allies, and continues to pound the besieged Sunni rebels. It looks now more of an attempt that the entire city will be taken before Barack Obama leaves presidential office next year, convinced that America is now powerless to act in stopping this relentless onslaught. The deliberate and planned brutality, in which hospitals are repeatedly attacked, will only feed Sunni resentment and stoke the flames of extremism even more. So will Russia’s orchestrated choreography that Assad should remain in charge of any future power-sharing government.

By contrast, however, Mosel could yet emerge as a model for defeating the jihadists by creating a saner political framework that fully recognises the stake that Sunni Arabs’ have in Iraq. With American support, Iraqi, Kurdish and local Sunni tribes are closing-in on the city. The Jihadists have been severely rattled and are far less effective in Mosul than they once were. The loss of Mosul would deal a blow to IS. It was from there that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the IS leader, declared his caliphate.

But much can still go wrong in Mosul. Nobody knows just how hard IS will fight. There are concerns that the Iraqi government has not done enough in preparing for a mass exodus of civilians, or, too, that it will be unable to prevent an armed free-for-all by Shia, Kurdish and rival Sunni militias. Yet, for all its violence and chaos, Iraq offers real hope. Its politics has evolved that is now more open than those of most Arab countries. It has an energetic and lively press and, despite having a parliament that is best described as rowdy and disorderly, cross-sectarian alliances are starting to form. Even Shia politicians are anxious in shaking off their image as proxy clients of Iran. Sunni Arabs in Iraq are moving away from the politics of rejection and are setting their sights on reconquering Baghdad.

Iraq could yet give the Arab world a welcome new model of devolved power, a triumph following the failures of Arab nationalism, Islamism and jihadism. This would make it much harder for murderous dictators to terrorise their people, and by giving diverse ethnic groups a perceived awareness that they rule themselves. Would-be separatists, most notably the Kurds, might be convinced to remain within existing frontiers.

More flexible forms of government might just ease some of the conflicts of the Arab world, even the atrocious bloodletting in Syria. Under such looser forms of government, the balance of power would invariably differ but would be required to follow a few basic principles. Because no region is ethnically pure, the first of these principles would require sub-entities respecting the rights of minority groups. Following on from that would be the need for all groups to have a share of power in central government. A further presumptive principle is that national resources, such as oil, must benefit the whole population. And lastly, perhaps the most difficult, would be to find the right balance of armed force between national armies and local police forces. This would allow minorities to feel protected and by discouraging local warlords and clan chiefs from rebelling or breaking away.

On paper at least, Iraq’s constitution does provide for much of this. It should become a reality. Devolution may not end all political quarrels, but if it stops the bloodshed that will be progress. It is imperative that Mosul be captured judiciously, with care for civilians and political consensus or agreement on how it will be run after the defeat of IS. The city should not only become a test of the maturity of Iraqi politics, but also a measure of the responsibility of outside powers. Saudi Arabia and Iran should support reconciliation and reconstruction. Western forces should be committed to the long-term if stability and political reform is to hold.

Mosul offers the only real opportunity to convince beleaguered Sunnis that there is a better alternative than the nihilism of jihad. If the politics that emerges feeds their sense of dispossession, expect the violence to go on. What happens in Mosul matters to many other places outside of Iraq; it might even give hope to the desperate situation in Aleppo.

iraqmap

Map highlighting the most important strategic locations in Iraq.

 

Standard
Europe, France, Government, Islamic State, Society, Terrorism

Europe and Islamist attacks

TERRORISM IN EUROPE

Intro: President François Hollande of France may think that declaring war on the extremists will shore up his own fragile political position

THE INSTINCTIVE RESPONSE on horrors such as those that have taken place in France and Germany in recent days is to look for a pattern, a narrative that might go some way to explain the inexplicable.

The brutal and bloody murder of an 86-year-old priest in Normandy invites such thinking, since it follows years of attacks on Christians in the Middle East: first by al-Qaeda and then by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Is radical Islam seeking a war with Christianity?

The very suggestion or notion of such a conflict between faiths would delight followers of ISIL, but it is hard to reconcile with that group’s dreadful persecution of fellow Muslims. ISIL has killed many more Muslims than it has Christians or Jews.

Or are the Islamists targeting Western liberal values more broadly, seeking to reinstate the Islamic Caliphate that once existed across the Middle East and parts of Southern Europe?

If so, that end has been poorly served by the enormity and mayhem in Normandy and Bavaria, lands that were never home to Muslims in the middle ages and which have only come to have Muslim residents as a result of those liberal Western values.

Seeking some kind of explanation for the evil that has been perpetrated is perfectly natural, but we should not impute too much calculation or design to those individuals who carry out such heinous crimes.

Whilst we may look for explanations the truth is there is no rationale or logic, nor any coherent argument in explaining away why Europe is suffering such appalling atrocities on its streets. These are the acts of inadequate and disturbed individuals with a nihilistic desire to destroy anything that challenges them and their ill-formed and warped idea of the world.

We must harden our defences against such acts, but we should be wary of the idea that those acts represent a clash of cultures – for that suggests some sort of parity between irrational extremist ideology on the one hand and a civilisation of shared traditions developed over thousands of years on the other.

President François Hollande of France may think that declaring war on the extremists will shore up his own fragile political position. Such a response, however, also risks validating the arguments of Marine Le Pen’s National Front (i.e. that the French establishment has failed to face up to the existential threat of terrorism).

Security and intelligence operations should be reviewed in the face of these latest attacks, particularly as the numerous intelligence agencies that operate in France are highly dysfunctional and disjointed. Great care must be taken not to dignify the attackers or their pathetic dreams of grandeur. They are murderers only deserving of contempt.

Standard
Britain, Government, Islamic State, Military, NATO, Politics, Turkey, United States

Warplanes pound Islamic State as Turkey enters the fight…

ISLAMIC STATE

Turkish F-16s carried out airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Syria.

Turkish F-16s carried out airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Syria.

Turkish warplanes pounded Islamic State targets in Syria and police have detained hundreds of suspected militants across Turkey – a clear sign that Ankara may have shed its hesitancy in taking a front-line role against jihadist fighters in Syria and Iraq.

Turkey has long been a reluctant partner in the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State, and has emphasised (more) the need to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Turkey also insists that Syrian Kurdish forces pose a grave security threat.

The attacks on Islamic State targets inside Syria, however, and the early morning raids across 13 provinces at home are among its most robust and forceful operations yet. It is believed that Turkey has moved to a position of ‘active defence’ rather than its previous ‘passive strategy’.

Turkey acted within hours after Washington confirmed that Ankara had agreed to let U.S. fighter jets launch air strikes from a base near the Syrian border, dropping its earlier refusal to allow manned American bombing raids from there. A Turkish government official said: ‘We can’t say this is the beginning of a military campaign, but certainly the policy will be more involved, active and more engaged… But action won’t likely be taken unprompted.’

Turkey has faced increasing insecurity along its 900-km (560-mile) border with Syria. A cross-border firefight last week between the Turkish army and Islamic State, which has seized large areas of Syria and Iraq, left one militant and one soldier dead.

Three F-16 fighter jets then took off from a base in Diyarbakir, southeast Turkey, and hit two Islamic State bases and one ‘assembly point’ before returning to base.

A study of the terrain and region suggests that Turkish fighter jets may not have crossed the Syrian border during the operation.  Rather, air strikes may have happened from Turkish airspace near the Turkish town of Kilis.

The attacks are the first time that Turkey has bombed Islamic State in Syria. The aim of the strikes could also be to help rebels on the ground control areas near the border instead of Kurdish forces (who were also targeted).

Turkey has suffered a wave of violence in its largely Kurdish southeast after a suspected Islamic State suicide bombing killed 32 people, many of them Kurds, in the town of Suruc on the Syrian border last week.

Police rounded up more than 250 people in raids against suspected Islamic State and Kurdish militants in the raids which followed. The government in Turkey says it is determined to fight all ‘terrorist groups’ equally.

Helicopters and more than 5,000 officers, including special forces, were deployed in the operation. Anti-terror police raided more than 100 locations across Istanbul alone.

It is understood that last week’s air strikes and action against terrorist groups were steps taken as preventative measures against a possible attack against Turkey from within or from outside. Turkey has repeatedly said it would take any ‘necessary measures’ to protect itself from attack by both Islamic State and Kurdish militants.

U.S. defence officials said that Turkey has agreed to allow manned U.S. planes to launch air strikes against Islamic State militants from an air base at Incirlik, close to the Syrian border. U.S. drones are already launched from the base. The U.S. and Turkey are working together to stem the flow of foreign fighters and secure Turkey’s border.

The ability to fly manned bombing raids out of Incirlik against targets in nearby Syria could be a big advantage. Such flights have had to fly mainly from the Gulf.

Turkey’s stance has frustrated some of its NATO allies, including the United States and Britain, whose priority is fighting Islamic State rather than Assad. The allies have urged Turkey to do more to prevent its border being used as a conduit to Syria by foreign jihadists.

  • 27 July 2015

An extraordinary meeting of NATO is to be held in Brussels tomorrow, Tuesday 28 July, following Turkey’s request to discuss the escalating violence caused by the crisis in Syria. The meeting was invoked under Article 4 of the NATO treaty.

The treaty allows any one of the alliance’s 28 member states to request assistance when they consider ‘their territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened.’

A statement issued by Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO Secretary General, read: ‘Turkey requested the meeting in view of the seriousness of the situation after the heinous terrorist attacks in recent days, and also to inform Allies of the measures it is taking.

NATO Allies follow developments very closely and stand in solidarity with Turkey.’

The request comes as Turkey continued its airstrikes against Islamic State extremists in Syria and a widening of its anti-terror campaign to hit Kurdish militant targets inside Iraq. It is understood that Ankara is seeking the deployment of a surveillance aircraft because of the issues it is having along its border.

The basis for the request is that use of surveillance aircraft will help to create safe zones inside Syria with the Turkish border being policed by a military presence (presumably from NATO and members of the US-led coalition).

Article 4 has been invoked on numerous previous occasions. Turkey called meetings in 2003 and 2012, and was put into effect by Poland in 2014.

The escalation in military activity by Turkey comes after a spate of terrorist incidents, the most notable after a suspected IS suicide bomber killed 32 people, some of them Kurds, in the border town of Suruc. Trouble then flared in the mainly Kurdish southeast, with the rebel Kurdistan Workers Party or PKK killing two police officers, claiming it was retaliation for the suicide attack.

Washington has backed Turkey’s airstrikes against the PKK, saying: ‘It has a right to defend itself’.

The PKK has been fighting Turkey for autonomy since 1984, and has been classified as a terrorist organisation by Ankara.

Statement issued by the National Security Council in Washington.

Statement issued by the National Security Council in Washington.

  • 28 July 2015

The setting up of ‘humanitarian safe zones’ across Turkey’s borders with Syria is something that has been discussed at length by Ankara and Washington, but prior to today’s NATO meeting in Brussels had not been finalised.

Although U.S.-backed Kurdish fighters control most of the 565-mile boundary between the two countries, Islamic State occupies a stretch which is some 60 miles long.

The creation of a buffer zone could open up a safe haven for thousands of Syrians who have been displaced by the crisis, but it would require air cover which would no doubt come from the US-led coalition.

Ground forces to hold and protect it would have to come from local contingents, or from a land deployment by members of the coalition – or Turkey itself.

The Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), the armed wing of the Kurdish Democratic Party (PYD), urged the Turkish government to halt attacks against Kurdish fighters inside Syria, after shells injured several people including Kurdish villagers outside an Islamic State-held town. Turkey has denied making these attacks. Kurdish fighters claimed their positions had come under ‘heavy tank fire’.

More than 1,000 people have been detained in a crackdown on militants in Turkey – with Islamic State, the PKK and the leftist DHKP-C among the groups targeted.

  • 29 July 2015

. Turkey has the second-largest army in the NATO alliance.

. At the NATO meeting in Brussels some European nations expressed concern that Mr Erdogan is using the opportunity to bomb Kurdish groups he brands a threat to the integrity of the Turkish state, but which enjoy some sympathy in the West.

. What has been called for is a ‘proportionate use of military force’. But how will that be defined?

. The Allies said that Turkey’s decision to hit the PKK camps in Iraq at the weekend was justified.

. Germany urged Turkey to respect the principle of proportionality.

. Stoltenberg defended NATO’s “limited role in the fight against Islamic State”.

. He argued that the alliance was already active in combating terrorism across the Mediterranean, in Afghanistan, in Jordan and Iraq.

. Turkey did not invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty.

. Mr Edogan said that Turkey is exercising its right to defend itself and will exercise this right until the end. He also said that there could be a duty for NATO, and asks that NATO to be prepared for this.

. The United States made some concessions and has pledged to work with Turkey to create a safe zone inside Syria for displaced persons.

Kurds Map

 

Standard